Famous for being famous

Kim Kardashian and the Kardashian empire is the epitome of a celebrity who is “famous for being famous”. Apparently it started when she was spotted a few times with Nick Lachey after he broke it off with Jessica Simpson. At the time she was friends with Paris Hilton – who you could say is also famous for being famous- and the paparazzi took a liking to the pair. Now with her own show, clothing line, clothing store, nail polish ect. she is an iconic image in American society. I found on Kim’s website that she had just traveled to Haiti with her mother, Kris Jenner, who helped create the Kardashian empire. If you look at the photos, Kim and Kris are shot in full makeup and hair with unidentified black people in Haiti. This pertains to what we were talking about in class on how celebrities are shot in places like Haiti surrounded by colored people were are not even recognized or given a name. The people that surround Kim Kardashian in the pictures are captured as props rather than people. This is a way Kim is keeping her image as the in front of the paparazzi by traveling to Haiti to show she is concerned with Maria Bello’s charity.

the Kardashian case is a result of brilliant marketing. But this phenomenon of famous for being famous has been going on for a long time now. Ever since reality TV became a hit you could see more and more of them everywhere. endorsing stuff, selling stuff, and always trying to remain in the spotlight with a controversy of some sort. as long as they can keep the cash flow coming in for doing nothing they are happy. who wouldn’t?

I think figures like Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton are fascinating (and also a bit terrifying). They really speak to our society’s obsession with wealth. You could even argue these families are living the most materialized version of the American Dream which is why we feel the need to watch their lives so closely. They have money and as far as I can tell, don’t really do anything. Their life of liesure and wealth is glamorized because its framed as something everyone should want and envy.

I suppose that one could argue that they aren’t just “famous for being famous” or “famous for being wealthy”, but they’re also “famous for being attractive”, which is something else they really only have a certain amount of control over, despite how much work they put in to maintain their public faces/bodies. I think the lack of any kind of royalty in this country has left tabloid media with a gaping hole to fill, and we’ve filled it with people who, much like royalty, are born into wealth/status and are expected to look and act a certain way because of it. It really contradicts the “work hard and anything is possible” narrative that is constantly being fed to us nearly everywhere else, and I can’t decide if this is amusingly subversive or sad and sinister.

I suppose similar arguments could be made against sports figures, in that, no matter how much hard work is involved, the really elite athlete is physically gifted and is going to be more durable than the average person. While hard work and dedication are essential components of top athletes, not everyone, no matter how much work they put in, is going to be able to throw a baseball like Roy Halladay or CC Sabathia. Although, the question of how sports fit in to all of these narratives we’ve covered in this class is probably another argument entirely, and would raise a disturbing set of questions of its own.

Although Kim Kardashian gives meaning to reality television’s “famous for being famous” game, the glamorized high life, etc., she has also given voice to an issue with no presence in mainstream culture before; The Armenian Genocide. As a viewer that avoids reality tv like the plague, I do think, culturally, in way Kardashian’s advocation for the recognition of the genocide is empowering for Armenian viewers that feel the same way she does;
“Even though so many countries around the world recognize the Genocide, the government of Turkey still denies it. It happened before Rwanda, Darfur, and the Holocaust. Maybe none of those other genocides would have happened if more nations had condemned the Armenian Genocide, when 1.5 million Armenians were massacred.”–Kim Kardashian (Article from MediaWithConscience). I believe viewer empowerment may come from the fact that the Armenian Genocide has made it into the public eye (not from watching the show[s]), that it’s in a kind of mainstream consciousness, but unfortunately at the cost of reality TV. I would pose to ask, if her “pop culture/low culture” image somehow devalues her social (celebrity level) activism?